Valve, a Video Game Maker With Few Rules is a New York Times article on Valve Corporation, offering their own take on the developer's unusual approach to their business. They discuss the company's forward-thinking approach and unstructured structure as well as Gabe Newell's publiccriticism of Windows 8. They also outline the current state of Valve's hardware ambitions, giving firsthand impressions of a prototype of the wearable computer and the company's big picture UI mode, which they say will enter public testing tomorrow: "On Monday, the company will begin a public test of a new television-friendly interface, Big Picture, for buying Steam games and playing them on computers in the living room."

Prez wrote on Sep 10, 2012, 21:01:All I ever really wanted from Valve the Game Company is more Half-Life. I suck ass at Counterstrike, despise F2P multiplayer games like TF2 and DOTA, and have had my fill of Left 4 Dead. But I still think Valve is the most important gaming company in history next to id (the old id, not the id of today) . The reason is Steam. Not only is Steam revolutionary, it has, in my opinion, saved PC gaming and has almost singlehandedly made it thrive in a gaming landscape heavlily dominated by consoles. I'm a fanboy, sure. But even if you aren't, can you honestly deny that Steam has had an overwhelmingly positive affect on PC gaming? How many PC game makers would have long since switched to console exclusives by now were it not for Steam illustrating clearly the market's viability? How many indie developers would remain undiscovered or would have just given up by now if it weren't for Steam?

Steam has some major issues that annoyingly have gone unaddressed for years now, so there is plenty of room for criticism. But I frankly just don't see how anyone can argue that Steam hasn't been great for PC gaming. Valve may suck at fan service when it comes to making games and keeping fans of their key franchise interested, but they made Steam, and that makes them great to me.

Yeah I pretty much agree with all that. I came off initially very trollish, but let's face it, trolling is like saying hello on the internet.

Half-life was definitely a fond memory. I had my moments in CS in the old days. I played a shitload of TF2 before it was F2P. I couldn't care less about DOTA. Portal I think was a decent puzzle game, I do in no way think it was worthy of a AAA price however. L4D was pretty good also, but yeah it got old fast as it's more of a social game, requiring teamwork beyond what public matches can provide.

As for Steam, yes I do love it. I have the '8 years of service badge', and I've been on it longer than that.(they don't count beta apparently...) As I've mentioned, I only complain because I care.

All I ever really wanted from Valve the Game Company is more Half-Life. I suck ass at Counterstrike, despise F2P multiplayer games like TF2 and DOTA, and have had my fill of Left 4 Dead. But I still think Valve is the most important gaming company in history next to id (the old id, not the id of today) . The reason is Steam. Not only is Steam revolutionary, it has, in my opinion, saved PC gaming and has almost singlehandedly made it thrive in a gaming landscape heavlily dominated by consoles. I'm a fanboy, sure. But even if you aren't, can you honestly deny that Steam has had an overwhelmingly positive affect on PC gaming? How many PC game makers would have long since switched to console exclusives by now were it not for Steam illustrating clearly the market's viability? How many indie developers would remain undiscovered or would have just given up by now if it weren't for Steam?

Steam has some major issues that annoyingly have gone unaddressed for years now, so there is plenty of room for criticism. But I frankly just don't see how anyone can argue that Steam hasn't been great for PC gaming. Valve may suck at fan service when it comes to making games and keeping fans of their key franchise interested, but they made Steam, and that makes them great to me.

“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” - Mahatma Gandhi

It will be interesting to see if they can get developers to support the idea, allowing for scalable interfaces and fonts in their games. CUrrently being able to buy games on Steam on my TV is of NO advantage to me, because more than half of them cannot be played on that same TV.

All of the blah blah valve interesting blah blah aside, I am looking forward to using the big picture mode. I play quite a few games on the HDTV with a lapboard, it's nice having the best of both worlds.

RailWizard wrote on Sep 10, 2012, 03:23:but the bottom line is always there(money)

Not for valve it isn't. See article, and my replies and quotes in this thread.

Incidentally, to comment further on what valve finds interesting... Valve doesn't find approving games to get on steam interesting. They say as much in the greenlight announcement. In the same announcement, they say the reason they are doing it is to let the community do the work instead. Thats the whole point of doing greenlight. Fortunately, my interests align with theirs, I want to see some top community voted projects appear on steam.Same thing with the portal editor. They did a semi-joking trailer about it, but they were deadly serious when in that trailer the cave johnson guy said they wanted the community to do the work of designing portal levels for. Thats not all that interesting to them. Fortunately, my interests again align with theirs I want to see some top voted community portal maps.

L4D series? Not interesting much anymore to valve. Not getting much new content (aside from an occasional community campaign). Not getting the promised support (have you seen some of the laughable patch notes where its obvious they don't even much bother to playtest the stuff they do there anymore?). Valve's interests and mine diverge in this case.

That's because pretty much all the major problems were ironed out of it long ago. They still work on balance tweaks on a regular basis, particularly since they frequently add promo stuff that matters rather than just hats.

It's been a long time since I liked playing it all that much, but it isn't hard to see that TF2 is the most perfect game (in the sense of "functional completeness") in the history of the hobby, and they're still working on it. That means something, and it's certainly not a something directly related to the bottom line.

Dev wrote on Sep 10, 2012, 02:23:As for full steam ahead, well doing these new things is interesting to them. Everything valve does can be easily explained by the question "is it interesting to them to do this?" If it is, they will probably do it. If its not, they probably won't. Cost isn't an issue. Most of the few remaining things are explained by Gabe's obsession (his word not mine) with his employee's health.

Well I hope you are right. Time will tell. I've said my piece, I hope it was heard. I don't know if I agree with 'is it interesting'... I can see that side of it, but the bottom line is always there(money), and I am fearful of it as that path comes so quick....and then you are left wondering "what happened to that thing I loved?". More than anything else I am referring to Battlefield here. FUCKING DICE, a foreign company, sold out to fucking EA, and now we get regurgitated shit. JUST LIKE THAT! Within ONE game cycle.(I liked BC1 and 2) It did take awhile, as EA has been their publisher for the whole shwack, but now it's time to be(at) CoD. Aka Activisions zombie IP.

Tf2 may be the most patched game in PC gaming history, but the majority of those patches are for hats and 'deals' for 'pre-ordering' other games.

RailWizard wrote on Sep 10, 2012, 00:48:edit: actually to clear things up, MY advice to Valve is to become relevant again. I.E. RELEASE some games that you have developed.

As I've said in a number of threads, valve could never again release another game, and still rake in piles of cash. Steam will continue to give them piles of money for the foreseeable future. In fact, releasing their own games makes them very little compared to what steam brings in. It has nothing to do with them being relevant as a company.

So your answer is simply that they are making money, so who cares if they don't make money based on what made them famous to begin with?

As I HAVE pointed out, I do like steam and I like the games I have bought off of it, but I am still leery just the same as if it was EA that I was trusting with my 100+ game library. Steam is already quite bloated IMO, and it seems that it is 'full steam ahead' in that direction. I DO NOT like that.

Serve MY games, that should be enough. They need to remember what they are.

No, I didn't say who cares. I said that has nothing to do with them being relevant as a company.

I care. I want more games in the same universe. But since valve doesn't seem much interested in pushing them out in even a remotely reasonable timeframe, I think they should farm it out, like they did with opp for.

And EA and Valve are hugely different companies. EA only cares about profits and pleasing shareholders. They don't care much about if they screw over customers or not (as they frequently do). If it makes them an extra buck, they will screw over the customer in a heartbeat. Valve really doesn't care nearly that much about profits, and doesn't have any public shareholders, so they aren't beholden to them. They at least aren't actively out there trying to screw over customers. Its just not too interesting to do their best to serve them at all times.

As for full steam ahead, well doing these new things is interesting to them. Everything valve does can be easily explained by the question "is it interesting to them to do this?" If it is, they will probably do it. If its not, they probably won't. Cost isn't an issue. Most of the few remaining things are explained by Gabe's obsession (his word not mine) with his employee's health.

RailWizard wrote on Sep 9, 2012, 23:03:Can you honestly tell me what it is that makes Valve so great?

Sure, they have made some great games in the past. They may even make 1 or 2 in the future.

Now beyond that, they have become a publisher, and as such, are seemingly not immune to the temptations of that role.

I am merely trying to predict the future here....

Soon they will roll out their app store(which no one asked for), as well as all this other gimmicky crap referenced in this article.

All I want is a decent online game store. I can get all that other crap from elsewhere, I don't need it from Valve.

edit: "special." That's right. Don't forget it.

Portal 2 was released just last year. L4D2 wasn't too long ago. Alien Swarm was released for free a couple of years ago. TF2 receives constant updates. Portal 2 received a substantial upgrade earlier this year. The new CS just came out.

They release major games and updates to their games way more frequently than any other major devs that I can think of. They haven't released an HL game in a while, but who cares? It's the most boring series they work on. Ep 1 and Ep 2 were just awful.

RailWizard wrote on Sep 10, 2012, 00:48:edit: actually to clear things up, MY advice to Valve is to become relevant again. I.E. RELEASE some games that you have developed.

As I've said in a number of threads, valve could never again release another game, and still rake in piles of cash. Steam will continue to give them piles of money for the foreseeable future. In fact, releasing their own games makes them very little compared to what steam brings in. It has nothing to do with them being relevant as a company.

So your answer is simply that they are making money, so who cares if they don't make money based on what made them famous to begin with?

As I HAVE pointed out, I do like steam and I like the games I have bought off of it, but I am still leery just the same as if it was EA that I was trusting with my 100+ game library. Steam is already quite bloated IMO, and it seems that it is 'full steam ahead' in that direction. I DO NOT like that.

Serve MY games, that should be enough. They need to remember what they are.